Hi, On 03/11/16 08:54, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 11/03/2016 02:36 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: >> At the moment we use the arch/arm directory for arm64 boards as well, >> so the Makefile will pick up the "arm" name for the architecture to use >> for tagging binaries in U-Boot image files. >> Differentiate between the two by looking at the CPU variable being >> defined >> to "armv8", and use the arm64 architecture name on creating the image >> file if that matches. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> > > Why is this important? To know the state you have to be in for > SPL->U-Boot transition later?
Yes. > Why didn't anyone else stumble over this yet? Because nobody's using SPL? Given the warnings and bugs I found when I compiled the SPL for 64 bit I'd assume the latter. But I was asking this question myself already. Apparently everyone just hacked their firmware chain to live with "arm" in there, APM being a prominent example. So given this I am a bit wary about the implication of this patch, I hope that people holler if this breaks their platform (and then fix that instead of hacking U-Boot again). Cheers, Andre. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
